Boehner: I sure hope Obama consults with Congress before he bombs Syria

posted at 8:01 pm on March 20, 2013 by Allahpundit

Oh please. Obama violated the War Powers Act to attack Libya and then offered the flimsiest possible defense for doing so. How much table-pounding did you hear from Republicans over that? They passed a meaningless resolution scolding O for it and then quietly let the matter drop when he ignored them. Some Republican hawks even defended him on the theory that the War Powers Act is unconstitutional as a violation of separation of powers. Is there any reason to think this time would be different?

Well, maybe.

Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said Wednesday that President Obama should consult Congress before launching military action against Syria, amid reports Damascus has used chemical weapons.

“I do think that the threat that Syria used chemical weapons is a serious one,” said Boehner in an interview with CNN. “I would hope that as the president is making his decision with what our reaction will be, that he will, in fact, consult with the bipartisan leaders in the Congress, something that didn’t happen before our involvement with Libya.

“This is an important part of the process and I would hope that he would reach out to the Congress so that we could be part of that process,” he added.

How angry is Congress really going to be if Obama spares them the responsibility of having to take a position on Syria’s rolling no-win clusterfark? That’s why the reaction to O’s War Powers gambit in Libya was muted even among Republicans who are normally eager to hammer The One for his transgressions. If they voted no on intervening in Libya and Qaddafi ended up slaughtering rebels by the thousands, Obama would destroy them for having enabled a massacre. If they voted yes and the U.S. somehow got sucked into Iraq redux in north Africa, suddenly the party has another “quagmire” on its record. In Syria, those same considerations apply ten times over. Tens of thousands have already been killed; rumors of WMD being used are floating around; the rebels who are trying to unseat the lunatic in Damascus have loads of jihadi lunatics in their own ranks. There’s no good outcome here for the U.S. and plenty of peril for American servicemen, especially if Special Ops is sent in on the ground to commandeer Assad’s chemical weapons. No matter which way you vote as a congressman, you’ll be held accountable for some horrific consequence of action or inaction. Obama has to make a decision because that’s his job as C-in-C but you’re kidding yourself if you think Congress will make a stink about not being allowed to share responsibility.

Or are you? The one X factor in this is the rise of Rand Paul and the popularity of his filibuster. If O sends U.S. jets into Syria, Paul will have no choice but to protest — probably not with another 13-hour marathon but with some sort of ostentatious objection, or else his lecture on the Senate floor and at CPAC about constitutional limits on the power of the executive will prove hollow. Will his colleagues in the caucus rally to him again? Will Rubio, who’ll likely support intervention on the merits, nonetheless back Paul in demanding presidential accountability to Congress, even if Paul is opposed to intervention? This would be a truer test of how isolationist the GOP has become than Paul’s drone filibuster was, since that was aimed at a narrow hypothetical, not an imminent real-world use of military force. Stay tuned.

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Comments

Sh!t in one hand, hope in the other, and see which one fills up faster, Mr. Speaker. How about threatening him with impeachment if he violates the war powers act again, since the only thing he gives a damn about is his own power and living like a king off government largesse?

Well, as long as Ogabe promises that he has been promised that those F-16s he sold or gave his terrorist friends in Egypt won’t be used to counter our attack that should be as reassuring as Ambassador Dennis Rodman’s comforting words on North Korea.

Oh please. Obama violated the War Powers Act to attack Libya and then offered the flimsiest possible defense for doing so. How much table-pounding did you hear from Republicans over that?

The whole “War Powers Act” is the problem here. Congress punted on their responsibilties when they gave the Executive Branch the ability to engage our military in combat without a declaration of war. Last declared war was against Japan (Germany declared war on us- why they did this is still a heated subject among historians).

So, as far as I am concerned, spare me the outrage when the rat-eared devil decides to use the military without a whole lot of Congressional involvement. That’s the way the system was set up when Congress decided it did not want to declare war or authorize military action.

I expect absolutely nothing from Boehner. I usually get what I expect.

Wino on March 20, 2013 at 8:09 PM

Right. Completely given up on these people. Resistance to the Left must be found elsewhere in the culture. Even Cruz was too mannered with Feinstein. He could have and should have replied, “yes, we agree you’re not a sixth graer. You’re a United States Senator who took an oath of office to uphold the Constitution. So the next question is, naturally, how could you have possibly proposed a law which violates what you swore to uphold.”

The one X factor in this is the rise of Rand Paul and the popularity of his filibuster. If O sends U.S. jets into Syria, Paul will have no choice but to protest — probably not with another 13-hour marathon but with some sort of ostentatious objection, or else his lecture on the Senate floor and at CPAC about constitutional limits on the power of the executive will prove hollow.

I think the idea of staying out of a ME war where neither side is even remotely friendly toward the U.S. would be very popular.

Should Boehner wish to finally cement his reputation of complete political harmlessness to the opposition he needs to start referring to himself in the third person like Bob “The Kansas Tornado of 1996” Dole did.

Oh please. Obama violated the War Powers Act to attack Libya and then offered the flimsiest possible defense for doing so. How much table-pounding did you hear from Republicans over that? They passed a meaningless resolution scolding O for it and then quietly let the matter drop when he ignored them.

Yep. the Weeping Boner and his gang of cowards are pretty much doormats who have let Barky do any damn thing he’s wanted over the past 4+ years with the un-Constitutional, illegal, impeachable and incredibly stupid Libyan war being but one of many stupid crimes that the House GOP has kept their mouths shut about. They are worms and idiots.

I don’t know how Boner looks at himself in the mirror, knowing what an unmitigated failure and embarrassing disaster he’s been – not to mention one who will go down in history as one of the biggest idiots ever as he stood around and let the 84 IQ Indonesian Dog-Eater take this nation apart. It’s beyond pathetic. I’d be embarrassed to even be a third cousin, twice removed, of the Weeper’s. He’s that bad.

If they voted no on intervening in Libya and Qaddafi ended up slaughtering rebels by the thousands, Obama would destroy them for having enabled a massacre.

I don’t think that line of attack would work for Syria though. It might have worked for Libya, before we got the full picture of who the various Arab Spring rebels were. Now, we actually have the evidence and lessons learned from Egypt and Libya that the rebels are really no better (in terms of either friendliness to the US or interest in actual representative government) than were their preceding dictatorships. In addition, we know from Iraq and Afghanistan that any boots on the ground war in those countries turns into a quagmire where the people we are fighting for have no more love for us than the people we are fighting against. Clearly, in the ME, the enemy of our enemy is not at all our friend.

I don’t think there is any will among the American populace at large to get involved in yet another crap sandwich in the ME, regardless of how many of their own people they manage to kill… McCain and Grahamnesty not withstanding.

Obama has to make a decision because that’s his job as C-in-C but you’re kidding yourself if you think Congress will make a stink about not being allowed to share responsibility.

This is not true. Obama does not have to make a decision because he is Commander in Chief of the armed forces when called into service. In fact he doesn’t have to do anything. We have zero strategic interests in Syria. None. Nada. Not a one. The whole thing can burn to the ground and it would make not one whit difference to the US. And in any case, under the Constitution it is Congress that has to make a decision about our armed forces. Simply because they’ve punted on that responsibility doesn’t mean it isn’t theirs.

Last declared war was against Japan (Germany declared war on us- why they did this is still a heated subject among historians).

Happy Nomad on March 20, 2013 at 8:20 PM

Can we please stop with this line of crap? Bush got a congressional declaration of war after 9-11. It was called the authorization for the use of military force. That is a clear declaration of war.

Or perhaps you believe that the use of military force could never, under any circumstances, be an ACT of war?

See, if you believe that the use of military force is an act of war, as it always has been, then you MUST believe that the authorization to USE military force is, at the very least, a declaration of intent to start a war (or perhaps engage in one already begun).

Oh please, ask you? And if he doesn’t then what? Boehner is a sniveling pos with a lot of elitist on both sides pulling his strings. What did anyone expect from a crying back stabbing egotistical politician?